Talk-Polywell.org

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ebels.html

My impression is that there are few "good guys" left in that civil war, most that might qualify among the rebels having been pounded shortly after ISIS got involved.

Assad is still better than ISIS. I know a few Syrians here and they were originally in support of the rebellion. Have long since changed their mind.

How much more unintended consequences (ISIS, refugees, mass introduction of Muslims into Europe) are the 'all seeing' and 'all knowing' meddlers going to give everyone. But don't worry, those 'smart' guys bury their mistakes.

Skipjack wrote:Assad is still better than ISIS. I know a few Syrians here and they were originally in support of the rebellion. Have long since changed their mind.

Yes, and Gaddafi was better than ISIS, and Morsi was better than the Muslim Brotherhood, and King Salman is better than the Wahhabi loons, and Shah Pahlavi was better than the Ayatollah Khomeini, and the Iranian loon brigade.



What do all these things have in common? Left wing Democrat *IDIOTS* in the name of "Human rights" and "Democracy", have wrecked existing and stable governments, killed thousands of people, and made matters far worse for everyone involved.


They do not grasp that Islam is not based on Christian ideas of "equality". It is based on a massive social pecking order from the lowest slave up to Allah, with everyone having their proper "station" in between. The word means "Submit", as in "submit to the chain of command leading to Allah."


A society built on an Islamic foundation is only fit to have strong man dictators running it. "Consensus" and "negotiation" are seen as weak, and unIslamic.


Bush and Bremmer made this exact same blunder. It was right and proper that they deposed Saddam Hussein, but instead of trying to force a "Democracy" on Iraq, they should have just let another Strong Man take the place over. As we had made our point, we would likely have had little trouble from the next ruler of Iraq. Instead we get this horrible mess that we have now with the Bulk of ISIS command and control made up of the ranks of Saddam Hussein's old Army officers.


Idiot Carter, Idiot Bush, and Idiot Obama.

You left out BengaziLibyServerClint for a reason?

mvanwink5 wrote:You left out BengaziLibyServerClint for a reason?

That's in Libya. That is a consequence of the Fall of Gaddafi.

True but we also have the history of our embassy facilitating the transfer of arms from Libya ending up in Syria for the rebellion. Kind of sort of like the Iran-Contra deal.

There was this one western leader who spent time as a hostage of the Muslims during his formative years, punished every day via flogging for refusal to convert his faith. When he came to power took a very different approach when dealing is Islam.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlad_the_Impaler

http://www.steynonline.com/7158/taking-it

And they will number as grains of sand in the sea...
500 days till the son of XXX is out of there and each feels like a year. I have doubts what will be left.

paperburn1 wrote:True but we also have the history of our embassy facilitating the transfer of arms from Libya ending up in Syria for the rebellion. Kind of sort of like the Iran-Contra deal.

The Iran/Contra deal was in the best interests of the United States, and was only necessary because the Democrat asswipes controlling congress at the time were full of traitors and crypto-communists.

Oliver North deserves a Medal for that.



The arms being smuggled to the Syrian Rebellion (ISIS) was a disaster of massive proportions, and completely contrary to the best interests of the United States.


All involved deserve prison for that.

Diogenes is funny because most of the republican candidates said that they would send troops to the middle east to "clean up". Translated that means "make things worse". But that is IMHO intentional because the military industrial complex keeps making money that way.

I like to call it 'Kinetic Policing'.

The trick is, figure out who you are going to schwack, get in, do the schwacking, and get out smartly.
Then you assess from a distance, if schwacking proved insufficient, figure out the next round of schwackees, wash, rinse, repeat as needed.
This whole idea of trying to stay in a cesspool of opportunistic power grabbers is just plain silly.

Get in, cut out identified cancers, get out. Repeat as required.
Let the body heal itself, provide non-invasive meds as desired to control symptoms, support healing. Or not as your resourcing and will direct.
No surgeon in his right mind stays inside a patient until they heal. As long as the wound is open, final healing is prevented.
If your goal is to assimilate the patient, then you stay, if not, then get the hell out.

I would argue, that if we had just whacked Saddam years ago, either before or after Kuwait, things today would look significantly different. How many times does someone have to jam his finger in your eye before you put him down?
Avoidance is not a viable long term strategy. The other guy, sensing weakness, will hardly ever lose interest. The lure of easy free stuff is just too strong for the human condition.

Well, Iran doing well enough to be able to have a nuclear program is a direct result of the power vacuum left behind by Saddan. He kept Iran down. Now they can do what they want.
Of course the current situation in Iran is a direct result of the US (and the UK) meddling in its affairs before that (which is why they hate us so much).
I just cant look back once in history where the US meddled in affairs that were not its place to meddle in that turned out well.

ladajo wrote:I like to call it 'Kinetic Policing'.

The trick is, figure out who you are going to schwack, get in, do the schwacking, and get out smartly.
Then you assess from a distance, if schwacking proved insufficient, figure out the next round of schwackees, wash, rinse, repeat as needed.
This whole idea of trying to stay in a cesspool of opportunistic power grabbers is just plain silly.

Get in, cut out identified cancers, get out. Repeat as required.
Let the body heal itself, provide non-invasive meds as desired to control symptoms, support healing. Or not as your resourcing and will direct.
No surgeon in his right mind stays inside a patient until they heal. As long as the wound is open, final healing is prevented.
If your goal is to assimilate the patient, then you stay, if not, then get the hell out.

I would argue, that if we had just whacked Saddam years ago, either before or after Kuwait, things today would look significantly different. How many times does someone have to jam his finger in your eye before you put him down?
Avoidance is not a viable long term strategy. The other guy, sensing weakness, will hardly ever lose interest. The lure of easy free stuff is just too strong for the human condition.

This is pretty good. I wonder how well it would work in practice. Certainly cheaper. Although it might generate long term resentment and never end. I think the Israelis do something like this sort of thing?